skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
To stretch the analogy, the equivalent of an HFT firm in English folklore would probably be a toll-road operator; or a city-state customs officer accepting lesser private bribes in place of levying greater official tariffs on imported goods.

Robin Hood, by stealing from the rich and giving to the poor (in a period with commodity currency with no monetary policy), would be encouraging deal-flow (as the rich traders stolen from need to send the same goods again to fulfill their contracts; and the poor now have money to spend to purchase exotic goods, requiring more be imported by traders), in turn increasing travel on the toll-road/through the customs office, in turn making the toll-road operator/customs officer money. It would make perfect sense for the mythical Robin Hood to, in fact, be a toll-road operator/customs officer — or at least to be in cahoots with them.

(In fact, come to think of it, he wouldn't even need to steal from the rich, per se. He could just destroy trade caravans, and collect a cut of the revenue from the toll-booth operators; or destroy goods already imported but not yet sold, and collect a cut from the customs office; and then distribute said cut to the poor. The same virtuous(?) cycle would occur.)
Ask HN: Is Firefox working on supporting Web Bluetooth?
Is Mozilla planning to have Firefox support Web Bluetooth API [1] in the close future? I tried to find some open discussions or roadmaps but couldn't find anything.

I know the technology has received some criticisms regarding its security [2]

[1] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Web_Bluetooth_API
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21332283
It's only terrifying to hedge funds and the rich. We've seen this before in very limited circumstances where citizens acting on their own, force the hand of the powerful/rich, who really don't like to be challenges.
It's just manipulation- as a flood of rubes come in to "buy and hold" the price explodes and then some rubes get into options trades that give them downside exposure, some short the stock, some believe the hype and think it's an investment, and some are there to speculate but can either only go long or get the timing wrong.

So the buying pressure at some point subsides, and momentum to the short side builds as people exit.

Participants in these forums like yahoo finance before it are constantly trying to exhort the group to move into names in which the touts already have positions setup.
The real problem is that pull requests are the wrong form of communication. By the time someone sends a pull request they already put a significant amount of effort into their message and thus will rightfully get angry when their efforts are being rejected.

You need to contact the maintainers directly and talk with them, preferably in an informal format where it is okay for things to be forgotten or thrown out.

The fact that things are written down and recorded forever with an expectation of work is what is causing all the problems.
I am surprised that the cornering of the silver market in 1980 is not mentioned here. The Hunt brothers had driven the silver price to the moon, so the big guys simply had the rules at COMEX changed, which led to a sudden drop of the silver price.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver_Thursday
The idea isn't to hold forever

It's to hold until the hedge funds are forced to buy at any price to close out
If it were not so shorting wouldn't be considered high risk...
For anyone who is fatigued by web and telecomms audio quality, I highly recommend trying out JackTrip: https://ccrma.stanford.edu/groups/soundwire/software/jacktri...

If you've ever been in a recording studio with headphone monitoring / studio talkback, it's like that. Really intimate.

This project uses RTCDataChannel for audio, which is very neat, but it's a shame that once again audio on the web has to be hacked to perform well.
If MAUs is hard, then don't use MAU as a billing metric? Charge for concurrent connections or by the minute maybe?
Perhaps this is proof regulations on the market should be stricter, then. After all, if a bunch of barely coordinated randos on the internet can do this through the power of 'meme magic', imagine what people with real resources and power and influence could do.
So if there isn't one entity short 140%, is it that there are multiple chains of shorting, like shorts on top of shorts that leads to the 140% target?

Not totally familiar with all this, just trying to understand.
The article is very tendentious.

I despise HFT as much as the next guy, but it's mostly useless rent seeking, economically, not massive manipulation. There is money on the table in trading, and the HFT firms try to take a bigger part of that pie, rather than letting it go to their competitors or other traders (like funds or retail investors).

Next, hedge funds shorting businesses they consider overvalued is a perfectly fine activity that helps price discovery and capital allocation. To the extent that they are deceptive and manipulative, that is a problem, just as deceptively and manipulatively hyping a stock up is a problem.

Finally, note that there is no value created here. It's purely a transfer of money. A few hedge funds might lose something (though that remains to be seen - shorts have no expiry, per se, and the borrow cost is absolutely manageable over days, weeks, or even months).

But mostly, this will be a huge transfer of money from those that jumped on the long trade late, to those that were in it early.

EDIT to add: And, putting a cherry on the fine research that went into the article, the Keynes quote is from A. Gary Shilling from the 1980s.

https://quoteinvestigator.com/2011/08/09/remain-solvent/
> be painted as trying to "incite" violence,

They're using the "terrorist" word already in many cases.
My thoughts exactly.

People want what is in our heads. Which is it?

Some idealized, and by nature limited sub set or idea, or the real deal?
> It may be the one thing the QAnons and the AOC wing of the Democrats actually agree on

I would argue they share a lot of similar grievances, but who has been cast as the reason for them is vastly different.
Once panic sets in we are running on instincts.

A lot of airplane passanges die in crashes because they are unable to unbuckle the seat-belt (everyone is trained by cars to push on the button not pull the buckle).

Unbuckling airplane seatbelt is far easier then having secret door handle in the doors.

All for sake of form over function.
Not sure if your comparison is so great.. are there apartments whose rent price fluctuates over 1000%?

Also subletting is not selling..
The same liberal party that bailed out Wall Street last time?
> Or even better, if both is the same.

That makes it just less transparent. You still have to be
careful and know the difference or one day you unintentionally
create a shallow copy of an object and now you've got a bug the
runtime won't warn about. Yes, Rust is more complicated and
harder to get into in those areas, but in return it's not as
ambiguous. I know that calling `clone()` will always do just that,
no edge cases, and even if I were wrong the compiler would
immediately tell me because of a type mismatch.

Realistically I don't think any of the two approaches is
significantly faster. But I know what I find more consistent and
less frustrating to debug.
Thank you for the kind words, they do mean a lot. (Still have some insecurity about losing that job, can't deny.)

As outlined in more detail in another sibling comment, I had a lot on my plate in my personal life during the gig and I couldn't pull through in time (in their eyes at least).

I am glad and proud that I managed to overcome literal dozens of obstacles -- most of which with tech that's extremely hard to master, with Kubernetes at the top spot -- but I still wish I could work with them again. But with some culture modifications. Which, I realize, won't ever happen. Plus most companies and teams never change their culture.
Honestly all those paragraphs above about how "simple" it is to host it on their own kind of proves his point in my opinion. They don't want to be in the code hosting business, they want to be in the improve curl and get the big project to rewrite some of it in rust done business.

I maintain our big companies githib enterprise host and we are working on finally convincing security to let us move to github.com. There are more features there and it's one less thing my team has to maintain or risk dealing with downtime. Let the experts do that, it's cheaper and more reliable in the end.
The biggest tragedy of this is the mistaken belief that a bunch of little guys is actually profiting off Wall Street. The big boys are mostly the ones playing this game, and the little guys are mostly just chasing the ball around.
> Can Citadel exercise any sort of discretion on what order-flow they'll fill? Can they legally tell Robinhood that they will no longer fill orders for GME?

Legally not, illegally... yes, and try to prove that.
I'm just guessing here, but another thought is that since Robinhood apparently want to IPO in the near-mid term future, they would rather take the “bad press” now, than take it in a month when it’s “Gambling allowed on Robinhood ruins lives as Robinhood makes record profit”
This helps sketch why derivatives for stocks should not be legally tradeable. The stock isn't supposed to be an investment vehicle, but a tool for steering the owned corporation.

Indeed, this entire situation is analogous to the economics of running a GameStop-like trading post, where preorders are allowed. The store wants to sell lots of preorders in order to stay afloat even outside of release seasons, and customers want to purchase preorders in order to guarantee a low price for hyped releases. This is just like the original purpose of derivatives, which were to ensure that foodstuffs would be fairly priced for both farmers and grocers, even when prepaying for not-yet-grown crops.

One would hope that GameStop would not sell preorders that it cannot guarantee from game publishers; if a game publisher promises only 100 copies to a particular brick-and-mortar, then they would be in big trouble if they took 140 preorders.

Now, folks generally agree that GameStop's business model is on the way out. The stock should not be worth much, because there is not much to say about the future of the corporation, and so not much point in participating in corporate governance. But instead, it is overly-shorted, with about 140% of shares sold short. That is no longer in the spirit of derivatives, but is now a magic trick.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GameStop_short_squeeze
The lesson in that quote is that it doesn't matter what you write, if someone with the right authority wants you hanged, or wants to shut down your discord, it'll happen regardless of due process.

This is different from what the parent poster is implying. It's about the dangers of authoritarianism. No plants or justification are necessary.
A lot of little guys are gonna be left holding the bag at the end, though. The stock was probably overvalued at $10. It's definitely overvalued at $400.
Facts won’t matter, they can ban just out of lawyer fear that they are at risk if they don’t ban.
That idea is progressive enhancement, is a best practice, and has been around for two decades
Their tagline is (or was at least) 'if 4chan found a bloomberg terminal'.

I say this as someone who frequented both communities at one time or another: they are very very very alike. I wouldn't be surprised if this who thing is a charade to take money from 'normies' as much a wall street.
Pump and hold may not be illegal but it means those people that pumped can’t sell for huge gains.
I use Opera for this feature alone, makes a huge difference!
The Tesla supercharger standard is open and the license fees owed to Tesla for implementing that standard are zero. https://www.tesla.com/blog/all-our-patent-are-belong-you

Tesla offered access to their supercharging network, as well. Predictably, the traditional auto makers wanted nothing to do with it, not even as a stop-gap, and instead had committees design inferior plugs for a minuscule and fragmented charging network that reliably fails to charge any vehicle.

Tesla is distinctly not part of the traditional auto industry. Tesla management insight into engineering and the marketplace is a fundamental differentiating factor.

Let’s say you’re a traditional upmarket car maker with a reputation for engineering excellence, and you want to computerize your dashboard. What’s your approach? I can tell you exactly what you’d do, because I’ve seen it: license windows CE and break your requirements down into team-sized chunks. Each team makes its own windows CE device. The devices are all supposed to talk to each other, but the teams implementing them don’t need to talk to each other, because they have formal specs for their components. Shockingly, when all the systems are assembled together, doors lock and unlock randomly, headlights are unreliable, and it’s common knowledge that you better not roll down a window, because you may need to go to the dealer to raise it. So, you try and fail to improve for the next model year. This continues for a decade before you even consider a different approach.
I did notice
> explosion in the take up of self-hosted social media platforms.

Network effects drive a lot of adoption of these things, which is a huge headwind against an "explosion" of them lasting that long.
There are people that "trust" stocks? To me it's always been a somewhat stupid casino game for the rich to rig.
As usual, the ToS are applied selectively, serving merely as a justification for arbitrary behavior.
A has 1 share of GME.

B borrowed it from A and sell to C.

C has 1 share of GME.

See, magically, A and C has 1 share of GME each.
I would say Haskell does a much better job but at the cost of much harder to predict performance.

Scala (which I use professionally) comes close to Haskell, but you need more discipline, because it has e.g. the concept of "null" and you have to avoid it.

What I like about Scala is that it has a sweet spot in the sense of a good number of jobs (way more than Haskell or Rust) and also having very good tooling (better than rust, not as good as Java though).

And Scala gives you this "if it compiles, it works" feel. But it has a steep learning curve.

I think F# is also great and underrated - same for OCaml. But because the languages are even more niche, they have less good tooling etc. What plethora of problems are you referring to btw?

Nim sounds exciting, but I've never used it either.

> I felt that I want to have such a powerful language like Rust in my toolbelt again.

If you are up for systems development, I would stick with Rust tbh. I think it will offer you some good job opportunities down the road and in general have a bright future. I don't think other languages like C++ or D can really compete with Rust in the long term.

Otherwise, I recommend to Haskell or Scala a try, depending on if you favor the learning experience or the practical gain.
I think it's a bit of both, but to be honest, it doesn't feel like sticking it to the man.

Why? Because it's a ponzi scheme. People who made money off this already (and are not holding the line) are not the people affected by the man. I don't believe my plumber, my electrician, or the busboy at the restaurant are investing their money on GME stock using Robinhood. Who do I see doing it? My friends, mostly young white collar workers with money to invest/lose in a bid to trying to get rick quick. Your typical reddit user of sorts.

I mean, my first few years on this country, while going to college at night, I worked construction. I worked with all kinds of people, from all kinds of lives and believes. When 2008 happened, many of them lost their life savings or their houses. At that point, I was working as a software engineer already, my older colleagues lost a chunk of their 401k - which they probably have regained and built upon by now.

Sticking it up to the man? I don't think so. The end of this will be fast and painful to many.
I agree there are some retail traders who are going in with eyes wide open. However, due to the power of greed, a significant portion is not. And, the end result will be people losing their retirement income.

So, the difference between your analogy is in the severity of the risk. Your car shouldn't let you drive into the mountains for a hike if it knows there's a 20% chance you're going to lose a limb that prevents you from living a happy life.
Yep, and this is a particularly silly article. One group of investors caught another group making a spectacularly poor decision. It just happens that the first group are retail traders (I'm not sure I would call them "investors").
Vivaldi had a blog post recently that touched on this tangentially.

https://vivaldi.com/blog/vivaldi-browser-vs-google-chrome/

> At the time, we found that the Chromium engine was secure and the most widely used – that was important to us. Moreover, Chromium was becoming the de facto web standard meaning that if we wanted web pages to not break, we’d have to fork Chromium.

I'll also observe that they made this decision around or before the time that Mozilla started oxidizing Firefox. So at the time, there was a lot of code churn, into an at-the-time unproven language, and the benefits had not materialized yet. If they were to start over now instead of then, the decision might be different.
Depends on your learning style. Simple, free online tutorials followed by years on the job practice with real data is what got me into Data Science/ML from scratch, ultimately running a ML team at a unicorn.

After reading thousands of Data Science/ML resumes and doing a lot of hiring, I find too many MOOCs to be a negative. They may be good for learning, but padding them on a resume isn't particularly valuable.
You can still do a three-point turn with your hands at the 3 and 9 (where they
should be). Instead of crossing your hands over the top of the wheel,
drivers will need to re-train themselves to guide the wheel while keeping hands
at the 3 and 9 like this: https://i.makeagif.com/media/6-08-2017/239ulB.gif

The problem that this wheel spotlights is that (too) many people
drive with their hand or hands at the 12 o'clock position. This can be
extremely dangerous when you need to swerve quickly (to avoid an obstacle) as
having one's hand there not only increases the turn radius well over what's
usually required to overcome the hurdle, but it also reduces steering control.
This creates a negative feedback loop wherein the driver makes extreme steering
decisions to counteract the perceived loss of control, which exacerbates impact
when the accident finally occurs.

Auto makers doubled down on this by adding premium materials to that part of the
wheel specifically to provide a nicer, luxury-feeling surface for the driver's
hand. Instead, Tesla is tapping their inner Apple courage by removing that part
of the wheel altogether (to both give drivers more view over their horizon and
to force drivers to steer properly or use Auto-Steer more often if this isn't preferred).

Tesla is also doubling-down on FSD with this approach as they are finally giving
drivers a wheel that is commensurate with their "Autopilot" tech.

I applaud Tesla for taking this approach with the steering wheel. I wish I could
upgrade my Model 3 to have this!
Game, stop.
That doesn’t reduce share counts.
People were saying the same when Tesla was 350$. Some suckers (e.g. me) actually believed them.
Can it? Aside from a very few functions reverse-engineered from LG's smartphone remote control apps, I've not found any way to control core display functionality via either TCP/IP or documented WebOS APIs, including such simple things as backlight brightness and display power on/off, at least on my 2018 model.

There is, on the other hand, a documented RS-232 protocol supported across many of LG's smart and "dumb" TVs that supports these things and more, so I threw together a trivial HTTP wrapper

https://github.com/jasminetroll/LgTvControl

that I use to control various TV settings via keyboard commands and Apple remote.

As a significant bonus, the RS-232 API has a "disable/enable OSD" command, so I can adjust brightness and switch between inputs without an annoying, oversized OSD window covering up a significant portion of the screen for several seconds telling me what I either already know from the resulting display (switched input to, e.g., the GPU connected to my Linux desktop VM) or don't care about (the numerical value of backlight brightness resulting from the latest up/down button press).
For accessibility and on general principle, you should use a <button> for a button.
The image I have in my head is less LOTR defenders or David(s) vs Goliath, and more of a horde of zombies that broke through a barrier and jumped some guards, but are about to be mowed down by a well-armed group behind a barricade. This isn't going to end well for the retailers - but hell if isn't sending a message.

Also the collateral damage is going to be more interesting to follow than the financials themselves. Already Discord and RobinHood painted themselves as enemies of the people - whether this was their least bad option legally, or they were influenced by Wall Street is immaterial - it's already viewed as the latter. Couple that with other high-profile bans by social media platforms this year (and it's not even February!), and I can see a lot of regular people all across the political spectrum who feel abused by big, rich companies. I think the last time we saw this kind of energy on the Internet, it led to Scientology protests, Occupy WallStreet and the Arab Spring...
Until China, Japan and Russia unite to provide disenfranchised Americans with a free internet that is off-limits from the grabbing hands of the US elites.

And it will thrive and will be a better place to make more money that SV for 5-10 years, until it gets censored like any public space.
We all collectively saw Wall St. dip into our pockets in 2008 yet here we are, aren't we?
Wall Street asked for exactly these sorts of deregulations. It's absolutely hypocritical for them to ask for exceptions to be made now and those half-assed versions of older regulations brought back but for only some traders.
I bought at 325 and sold 2/3 at 470. Now I basically can't lose money on the overall, but I'm still in it till the moon on that 1/3.
I haven't found that to be the case. In particular I think expecting the ORM to always do the best thing no matter how you use it is folly, ORMs are a tool that you have to take the time to understand in much of their full complexity.

Some would say this makes them a bad abstraction, but to me, data mapping is going to have to happen somewhere, and I would rather be building on someone else's work to write the data mapping for my applications than do it from scratch. You have to know when the ORM is the right tool to use, and when to drop into plain SQL for your querying, because they do not eliminate the need to write SQL, just reduce it significantly.
> There's no bull case for Gamestop at $468.50 a share this moment as I type.

Yes there is. The bull case is for those people who have options contracts that they need to fulfill.

If they do not fulfill those contracts there will be consequences: perhaps reputation loss, perhaps law suits, perhaps SEC investigations (with fines and/or jail time).

For those people, GME at even at $1000/share may be "cheap" compared to the consequences they face.
I think most people on HN associate Atom with the editor, when the link is to GitHub
I agree, it's not clear cut. It's unlikely that SEC goes after the WSB but they could.

What happened satisfies the four part test for market manipulation. But you would have to figure out the suspects who actually match the test. Most participants are just fools.
There is a precedent for this, look at all the shenanigans r/AgainstHateSubreddits is known for.